On May 8, Ihor Kolomoiskyi was suspected of organizing the contract killing of lawyer Serhiy Karpenko. According to the version of the Prosecutor-General's Office, in 2003 Kolomoiskyi demanded that the lawyer cancel the decision of the meeting of shareholders of the Dneprospetsstal plant, which the oligarch wanted to take over. Karpenko refused to do so. Soon after that, on the way out of the Feodosia store, Serhii was attacked — hit on the head with a metal bar, as well as stabbed in the chest, stomach and back. Sergei was prevented from being killed by his wife, who intervened. His life was saved by doctors. But Sergei has not yet received fair punishment for all those responsible, including the customer.
ZN.UA talked to Serhii Karpenko about the prospects for the completion of the case of twenty years ago.
— Serhii, to say no to Kolomoiskyi is always a risky decision. When did you realize that the situation was more serious than ever?
— Yes, from the very beginning. Literally right after that meeting, my assistant was attacked with hammers, pipes and a real brutal attack near the house where he lived. He was being murdered. If a neighbor hadn't intervened, he would have been killed, there's no doubt about it.
Then I realized that all the threats that were made were serious, not for a red word, not for the purpose of seeing if I was a tough guy.
That's why, in fact, I then wrote statements about threats to the Prosecutor General's Office and the Security Service of Ukraine.
But, as it later turned out, all these threatening statements either disappeared or were not acted upon.
— Did you receive threats directly from Ihor Kolomoiskyi?
— Yes, exactly as it was written in my statements. There was a meeting during which he personally threatened me. These threats were directly related to the meeting. We had no other conflicts with him before that. Admittedly, the whole situation was surprising to me. I had not seen this man for quite a long time, I came to the office, to visit, as they say, and then he starts telling me that he is the owner of Dneprospetsstal, that I have to do this and that, or else I will face the consequences.
It was, frankly, unacceptable to me. I immediately said that a pianist is not shot. There is a customer (at that time the largest shareholder of the company was Baring Vostok Capital Partners, a member of one of the largest European investment groups, and Veda CJSC from St. Petersburg, their shares were enough to ensure a quorum at the meeting, read more here. – Y.S.), go and do your work. We did our job and did it well. Everyone thought then that it was impossible to hold this meeting, but we did it. This, by the way, was our professional achievement. But if someone does not like it, well, thank you for your assessment and that's all. The rest of the points have nothing to do with us directly. If you have a corporate conflict, deal directly with the participants in the conflict.
Not that anyone heard us, so at the meeting with Kolomoiskyi, I had to say that my friend and I had to go to consult with a third partner. After all, even then we realized that we might not be able to leave the office: the territory was closed and few people saw us arrive there. Of course, we warned them that we were going to this meeting, but who knows how things might end up.
— Yeah, twenty years ago, times were tough.
— Disturbing, right.
But fortunately, we were able to leave that meeting. And then we said that we would not cancel anything. Unfortunately, I was the speaker, not one of my partners. Apparently, this was the reason why I became the central figure in all the events that followed.
On August 16, I went to see my family, who were in Feodosia. It was my wife's sister's birthday. We went to get a cake at the store. What happened next has been described many times. Everything happened in the center of Feodosia, in front of the police department, at six in the evening, when the square is full of people. What can I say, impertinent. The attackers thought they were absolutely unpunished. They thought they could do what they wanted and when they wanted.
— There were four attackers?
— Those directly involved, yes. One hit me on the head with a pipe, and three others stabbed me. But there were 11 people in the group of attackers in total, as the investigation later established.
Five of them were caught, I think, the same day or the next day. Because their car caught the attention of law enforcement. You know, the kind of accidents that are not accidental. And then everything started to unfold very dynamically, both the prosecution and the investigation.
Unfortunately, I was in intensive care for almost two months. My lung was smaller than a fist, and it took a lot of effort before I was able to recover. But when I was back in action, so to speak, the investigation was in full swing, and at that point some connections, phone conversations, and other clues had already been established that made it possible to put together a picture of what had happened.
At the same time, in August-September, people who knew the customer directly, i.e. communicated directly with him, were killed.
— Serhii Nikitin and Boris Sinelshchikov, right? (Members of the organized crime group that served the Privat Group at the time. - Y.S.).
— Yes. And Nikitin's death was initially declared as a suicide. Then, when the exhumation was carried out, according to the investigators, it turned out that he was far from being a suicide - such a number of knife and gunshot wounds were found on him. By the way, later a separate criminal case was initiated on this matter against the investigator who investigated the suicide, and against the expert who confirmed that it was a suicide. This is already, so to speak, a separate line. But, nevertheless, the people who were in direct contact with the customer were killed almost immediately after the assassination attempt. That said, among other things, that the customer would stop at nothing to avoid punishment.
— Is the information that Nikitin's killer is already dead reliable?
— I don't know. I do not possess all the materials of the investigation. Of course, some things that I know, I simply cannot disclose, because it is a secret of the investigation, but on this issue I know nothing for sure.
But since the investigation is ongoing, the process is underway, it means there is something to investigate. Apparently, it's not that simple.
— When was momentum lost in the initial investigation and why, in your opinion?
— You know, I can't really pinpoint it. I can only recall some spikes, so to speak, that there were. Actually 2003, when the main investigation was underway. Then 2005, after the Pomaranche Revolution, when there seemed to be hope that something would be different. Then the investigation subsided again (under Prosecutor-General Sviatoslav Piskun – Ed.). Some trials were going on, someone was dismissed, someone was appointed.
— The investigator, Ihor Sholodko, who initially led the case, has also died. What are your memories of him?
— There were two of them, investigators from the Prosecutor-General’s Office: Ihor Sholodko and Yurii Artiukh. Normal men in the service. They did their job honestly. Outwardly, at least, they were very confident. And they clearly believed that the evidence base was complete. Based on the entire array of data already in 2003, they were absolutely sure that they would bring the case to an end - they would take the entire group, including the organizer and the customer.
At that time, they already had a logical understanding of who, where, what, and how. As far as I remember, they had all the line connections, who called whom during the whole process, who was where, and so on.
This is the data from the investigation. Unfortunately, I do not know all of them, but once again I say that this is the evidence base, which, apparently, is the basis for determining who ordered the assassination attempt.
— And even then Sholodko and Artiukh were ready to raise suspicion directly to Kolomoisky?
— As I recall, there was no suspicion back then. There were accusations. The accusation was formed through an investigator's ruling. The next stage was taking into custody. The decision to take into custody was made by the court. As far as I know, the investigator took the charges to court, and, according to unofficial information, the judge was ready to make a decision to take Kolomoisky into custody, even went into the deliberation room, and then the investigator suddenly "turned on the back" and withdrew the charges.
— And for almost twenty years no one was in a hurry to bring any charges.
Do you consider the allegations against former Prosecutor-General Sviatoslav Piskun of taking a $50 million bribe to close this case credible?
— I can't say anything. If it is, it makes me squeamish. A person shouldn't do that. It's not even a question of position. Attorney General or not Attorney General. It's just that a man shouldn't do that. If he did it, well, may God be his judge.
You see, on the one hand, I never had any illusions about this case. On the other hand, I realized that sooner or later it would come to a conclusion. Because in fact the investigation continued even when it seemed that nothing was happening. Both in 2007 and 2009 I was approached by investigators. I participated in some experiments. Someone gave and someone confirmed their testimony. It was not as if everything stopped in 2005 and suddenly resumed in 2013.
— And all this time you were in Ukraine?
— Yes, I lived in Ukraine until the end of 2013 permanently.
I was not just living, I was professionally and socially active. I had a lot of activities and tasks, I even served as deputy mayor in Dnipro.
— And when you realized it was no longer safe to stay here?
— In the thirteenth year. It was another peak of interest in the case. In March, the trial between Victor Pinchuk and Igor Kolomoisky began in the High Court in London. And in August, if I'm not mistaken, I received a text message saying, "Look, my friend, you'll get a jump on us, we're keeping an eye on you.
When I received these threats, I realized that the story was taking a new turn. No one would protect me, no matter what anyone said.
Of course, I wrote a statement to the law enforcement authorities that I was being threatened in connection with my professional activities. They took me in, questioned me, even traced my phone traffic, and found a phone that had been "dumped". You see, someone was simply instructed to send a text to such and such a number, and then reset the phone. Where does the investigation go from here?
So I decided that I would leave. For seven years, I had not lived in Ukraine.
When Kolomoiskyi was the head of the administration, as far as I know, all the materials on my case were pulled to Dnipro. At the same time, investigator Sholodko, who at that time already lived in Zhytomyr region, was drafted into the Anti-Terrorist Operation, but was drafted for some reason by the Krasnohvardiisk military enlistment office of what was then Dnipropetrovsk.
— Let us clarify for readers that Krasnohvardiisk military enlistment office is not in Zhytomyr.
— Yes, yes, this is Dnipro. Moreover, Sholodko did not just go to the ATO, but ended up in Donetsk airport, where he died. It looks very strange.
Moreover, I was told that it was after Sholodko interrogated the possible customer at the embassy in Turkey that the case began to wane. The speed dropped, the actions became less focused. And in the end, he still went to the ATO.
— How did the fate of the second investigator turn out?
— I don't know. I don't have any contact with him.
— Ihor Sholodko interrogated Kolomoiskyi in Turkey in what year, 2012?
— No, it was earlier, but I can't remember exactly. I'm sure it's in the case file.
— And after that the pace of the investigation slowed down to a minimum, until in 2013 Victor Pinchuk, or rather, his lawyers decided to add the episode with the attempt on your life to the case against Kolomoisky in the High Court of London?
— Yes, and there is an important clarification: in 2007, I participated in the London arbitration as a witness on the side of Kostiantyn Hryhoryshyn in a dispute with Igor Kolomoisky. My testimony at that trial was also read out.
Hryhoryshyn won the trial, and Kolomoisky had to pay him both the principal amount and fairly substantial legal fees. I don't remember exactly how much, but I remember that I was struck to the core by the amount of legal expenses.
— Did you then testify specifically to the episode of the attempt on your life?
— Yes. Hryhoryshyn based his position on the fact that Kolomoisky is a dishonest, criminal-connected person, and he used my testimony and investigative data to confirm this characterization.
Apparently, in 2013, having already had experience, so to speak, Kolomoisky was not happy with the prospect that Pinchuk might try to use this case as a characterization of his "partner".... (the subject of the dispute was the Kryvyi Rih iron ore plant. – Y.S.). I decided to act preventively. Even before the direct threats from him a man came. Probably, it was 2011-2012, I will not lie. We met, he said: "Here we think that they will come out at you, they will want to use you to "pluck a boar". If they do, you let them know we're ready to talk." I replied that I had never closed myself off from talking, but that it should not be my initiative, nor should it be my responsibility.
Well after outright threats he just left and didn't show up here until 2020.
— Did Pinchuk's lawyers contact you in preparation for the London hearing?
— They came at me, but it didn't work out.
— So there is no understanding of why the Court of London refused to consider the assassination story as part of that claim?
— I don't know if the judge said no or not. How did the case end? Settlement. We don't know the reason or the contents of the settlement.
I was not invited to the court, and it is not known whether the case itself was considered. They could have taken my testimony from the 2007 arbitration. They were certified by the court. It is possible to take note of it. But I don't know what actually happened.
— What happened to the eleven direct perpetrators of the assassination attempt? Two died, and the rest?
— Two died, five were caught at once, three after a while. They were caught all over the former Soviet Union: some were caught in the Moscow region, some in Abakan. They all got real sentences.
There was such a telling moment when one of the suspected perpetrators was tried. I was at that trial in Zaporizhzhia, and I had information that he was told through his lawyer that he would be given six years, and he would be out on parole in three years. They said that we would keep you "warm", everything would be fine, you would be credited for the time you spent in the parcel. And he was so bold at the hearing, he was rude to the judges.
Here the judge reads out the sentence — twelve years of strict regime.
And he jumps up from the bench and says, "How can it be twelve?! They promised six!"
So the customer's attention to this case did not wane. They kept track of all these things. Everyone was always in sight.
— What happened to the last performer?
— He was caught in 2022. As they told me, by accident: they checked the database at a checkpoint, and he was wanted. They detained him, raised the case. They called me, said there'd be a trial. I said, OK, notify me of the time, I'll come. I arrived and was told that the trial had already taken place and that he had been released.
How'd they let you go? Well, because it's been 19 years. The statute of limitations had run out, so they let him go. I said, "Is it all right that the statute of limitations should have been suspended while he was wanted? There's a certain procedure that has to be followed. Well, it wasn't. It happens. Everybody's sorry.
And in the end, the man who participated in the attempted murder and twenty years running from justice — at large and not wanted.
— After this, were you surprised that already this year suspicion in your case was brought directly against Kolomoisky? Did the investigators contact you before that?
— I contacted the investigators. Back in 2022. Well, I said, the last perpetrator was caught and released - everything is clear, but what about the customers? After all, the case should be finished as a whole, not just the perpetrators. I was told that the investigation was underway.
— So the preparation for suspect 2024 began, in your opinion, as early as 2022?
— I think so. It's certainly not a spontaneous decision or a one-time action.
You see, our criminal proceedings have always been, shall we say, expedient. What may seem like a coincidence to us may well be expedient to someone else.
But in my position nothing has changed, and nothing has changed: if the truth can be established, let it be established. Let this situation end. I've been living with this process for 21 years in one degree of involvement or another. I just want it to end.
He'll be charged, he won't be charged. It's only a suspicion, not an accusation. How far the investigation is willing to go, I don't know. We'll see.
— And what do you think has changed in those 20 years that makes you think this case will be concluded?
— All processes come to an end at some point, and this one will, one way or another.
Maybe it will be terminated by the statute of limitations, just as with the direct perpetrator. Or maybe there will be a trial, study of the materials, maybe even with the participation of a jury, which would be very interesting. The main thing is to let this process end.
Back in 2003, maximum information was gathered and maximum moments were recorded to bring it to the finals.
In 2015, former deputy prosecutor-general Mykola Obikhod independently investigated the case. I communicated with him at the time - a very professional man. He put the whole puzzle together, completed the investigation, describing each step in great detail in a two-hour video. If I am not mistaken, he sent 15 flash drives with this movie to the Prosecutor General's Office, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the SBU, members of the National Security and Defense Council. All the flash drives were seized, as far as I know. By whom? Why? Maybe this question will also be answered....
I had a copy, too. I gave it to the investigation.
— When is it handed over? Now, in 2024?
— Yes. Now that I've been called in, interviewed. The investigation has to work out all the angles. They realize that they will eventually come to court anyway, if there is a suspicion. They understand that the suspect has a team of lawyers on his side, ready to defend himself. And then we will see the result.
— How do you feel about the fact that all these years, instead of restoring justice, your tragedy has been used by third parties to settle personal, political and business scores?
— I have no illusions about human justice. We all tend to use one circumstance or another to our personal advantage. I just want this case to end. How? That is a matter for the investigation, the court and your colleagues who will interpret and interpret the course of events.
— At this point, do you fear for your life?
— Uh, sure.
— The fact that Kolomoiskyi is in pre-trial detention does not reduce the danger?
— It makes absolutely no difference.
I mean, he's socializing. He has people "on the outside", with money, with all kinds of opportunities. They have not disappeared.